Bills to establish the National Popular Vote Plan in Mississippi failed to pass by the deadline for bills to pass committee, so the bills cannot pass this year. The bills, SB 2752 and HB 1244, had been introduced by Senator Eric Powell (D-Corinth), and Representatives Daniel Stephen Holland (D-Plantersville), and John D. Mayo (D-Clarksdale).
At least one State regime that KILLED the EVIL NPV Scheme from Hell.
NO uniform definition of Elector in the EVIL NPV Scheme from Hell — quite enough to KILL the Scheme.
They probably knew it’s not a good plan for Mississippi. Only the largest metro areas would be all campaigns would need to pay attention to in order to win under NPV.
The population of the top five cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia) is only 6% of the population of the United States and the population of the top 50 cities (going as obscurely far down as Arlington, TX) is only 19% of the population of the United States.
When presidential candidates campaign to win the electoral votes of closely divided battleground states, such as in Ohio and Florida, under the state-by-state winner-take-all methods, the big cities in those battleground states do not receive all the attention, much less control the outcome. Cleveland and Miami certainly did not receive all the attention or control the outcome in Ohio and Florida in 2000 and 2004.
In California state-wide elections, candidates for governor or U.S. Senate don’t campaign just in Los Angeles and San Francisco, and those places don’t control the outcome (otherwise California wouldn’t have recently had Republican governors Reagan, Dukemejian, Wilson, and Schwarzenegger). A vote in rural Alpine county is just an important as a vote in Los Angeles.
Likewise, under a national popular vote, every vote everywhere will be equally important politically. There will be nothing special about a vote cast in a big city or big state. When every vote is equal, candidates of both parties will seek out voters in small, medium, and large towns throughout the states in order to win. A vote cast in a big city or state will be equal to a vote cast in a small state, town, or rural area.
Further evidence of the way a nationwide presidential campaign would be run comes from the way that national advertisers conduct nationwide sales campaigns. National advertisers seek out customers in small, medium, and large towns of every small, medium, and large state. National advertisers do not advertise only in big cities. Instead, they go after every single possible customer, regardless of where the customer is located. National advertisers do not write off Indiana or Illinois merely because their competitor has an 8% lead in sales in those states. And, a national advertiser with an 8%-edge over its competitor does not stop trying to make additional sales in Indiana or Illinois merely because they are in the lead.
The main media at the moment, namely TV, costs much more per impression in big cities than in smaller towns and rural area. So, if you just looked at TV, candidates get more bang for the buck in smaller towns and rural areas.
A survey of 800 Mississippi voters conducted on December 21-22, 2008 showed 74% overall support for a national popular vote for President.
By political affiliation, support for a national popular vote was 79% for a national popular vote among Democrats, 75% among Republicans, and 75% among Others.
By age, support for a national popular vote was 81% among 18-29 year olds, 79% among 30-45 year olds, 75% among 46-65 year olds, and 76% for those older than 65.
By gender, support for a national popular vote was 82% among women and 71% among men.
By race, support for a national popular vote was 80% among whites (representing 61% of respondents), 72% among African Americans (representing 36% of respondents), and 60% among Others (representing 3% of respondents).
http://nationalpopularvote.com/pages/polls.php#MS_2008DEC
Where is the poll demanding a const. amdt. having
1. Uniform definition of Elector in AlL of the U.S.A.
2. P.R. in ALL legislative bodies
3. NONPARTISAN Approval Voting for all elected executive officers and all judges
???
What is the EVIL statutory fix mentality for stuff needing constitutional amendments ???
The population of the top five cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia) is only 6% of the population of the United States and the population of the top 50 cities (going as obscurely far down as Arlington, TX) is only 19% of the population of the United States.
We’ve had this discussion before. You are talking about urban boundaries, not metro areas and media markets.
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_United_States_Metropolitan_Statistical_Areas
And the media markets are bigger than those metropolitan statistical areas. For example, #2 (Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA MSA, 12,874,797) and #14 (Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA MSA, 4,143,113) are part of the same media market.
Rural areas? Fuggedaboutit.
If you think any campaign will send a candidate, or even a ranking representative, to a rural area ever again if/when NPV passes, think again.
When presidential candidates campaign to win the electoral votes of closely divided battleground states, such as in Ohio and Florida, under the state-by-state winner-take-all methods, the big cities in those battleground states do not receive all the attention, much less control the outcome. Cleveland and Miami certainly did not receive all the attention or control the outcome in Ohio and Florida in 2000 and 2004.
That is why I am for switching from state winner take all to proportional allocation of electoral votes within each state.
Thus, we would only need 2% of the popular vote to get an electoral vote in California, and about 9% in Alabama. All or almost all states would be battleground states, alternative and independent candidates could realistically win electoral votes, and people outside of major media markets – in small towns and rural America – would count, unlike under NPV.
Further evidence of the way a nationwide presidential campaign would be run comes from the way that national advertisers conduct nationwide sales campaigns. National advertisers seek out customers in small, medium, and large towns of every small, medium, and large state. National advertisers do not advertise only in big cities.
Bad analogy. Marketers for products don’t just have to get a plurality of consumers. They want to sell as much as possible. The pie is not fixed.
Under NPV, by concentrating on just a small number of media markets, a political party can win a plurality of the vote.
Alternative parties and independents would lose another avenue to make their voice heard.
There are numerous examples of Republicans who won races for governor and U.S. Senator in states that have big cities (e.g., New York, Illinois, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts) without ever carrying the big cities of their respective states. The biggest cities in those states typically voted Democratic, but the suburbs, exurbs, small towns, and rural parts of the states often voted Republican. If big cities controlled the outcome of elections, the governors and U.S. Senators would be Democratic in virtually every state with a significant city.
A system in which electoral votes are divided proportionally by state would not accurately reflect the nationwide popular vote and would not make every vote equal.
Every vote would not be equal under the proportional approach. The proportional approach would perpetuate the inequality of votes among states due to each state’s bonus of two electoral votes. It would penalize states, such as Montana, that have only one U.S. Representative even though it has almost three times more population than other small states with one congressman. It would penalize fast-growing states that do not receive any increase in their number of electoral votes until after the next federal census. It would penalize states with high voter turnout (e.g., Utah, Oregon).
Moreover, the fractional proportional allocation approach does not assure election of the winner of the nationwide popular vote. In 2000, for example, it would have resulted in the election of the second-place candidate.
If the National Popular Vote bill were to become law, it would not change the need for candidates to build a winning coalition across demographics. Any candidate who yielded, for example, the 21% of Americans who live in rural areas in favor of a “big city” approach would not likely win the national popular vote. Candidates would still have to appeal to a broad range of demographics, and perhaps even more so, because the election wouldn’t be capable of coming down to just one demographic, such as voters in Ohio.
How many States magically continue to survive by having ALL of the Electors-Voters in the State elect statewide executive officers and judges ???
So difficult to understand for the U.S.A. regime — with its supposedly national laws and treaties ???
Frankly, this is a bad idea. This is another thinly-veiled attack on states’ rights and on the Tenth Amendment. There are forces working to effectively abolish the individual states as seperate entities and transform the country into one entralized district. Just like Nazi Germany.
#13 Current 3 ANTI-Democracy gerrymander systems in the U.S.A. regime —
House, Senate, Electoral College.
— with lots and lots of ANTI-Democracy U.S.A. laws and treaties since 1789.
P.R. and App.V.
I’m not familiar with Senator Eric Powell, but Rep. John Mayo is a big liberal from the Mississippi Delta. And Rep. Steve Holland is a former undertaker (the last man to ever let you down) and an a##hole, in my view. Holland ran for the US House in 2008 and was pulverized.
#2: I don’t get your point. As I understand NPV, a state’s electoral votes would be cast for the winner of the national popular vote, regardless of the outcome of the popular vote in that state.